Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel's Upcoming Coffee Lake Processors Up to 30% Faster Than Kaby Lake Chips Coming to Mac Notebooks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Coffee Lake will come with CD-ROM trays that hold your cup.Intel's Coffee Lake is going to be a great success.
Tune in next year as...
Bless the folks that can keep up with all these chip names and improvements.
Bless the folks that can keep up with all these chip names and improvements.
What exactly was "older and cheaper" about the MBP when it was released?
I am sure you are confusing Apple with Microsoft here.
What exactly was "older and cheaper" about the MBP when it was released?
The CPU and GPU in the current Macbook Pro. For a £4000 machine..... the GPU is embarrassing, though impressive profit margin.
I actually don't mind the CPU/GPU they offer.....the high end model pricing is what offends me. £4K..... 16GB of ram....
And how can Apple bring out Coffee Lake when Intel have not release Coffee Lake.
By late 2017 Cannonlake will come out so if Apple hold of to September to get Coffee Lake they still would behind.
[doublepost=1496231367][/doublepost]
Than show me awesome GPU in any laptop.
[doublepost=1496231949][/doublepost]
OLED is very costly and I hope Apple does not bring out OLED laptop this year. People complain touch bar was costly.
If Apple bring out OLED laptop the base 13'' Macbook pro would be well over $2,000
Agree, I would object to a OLED laptop unless it was a smaller hybrid, but an LED backlight on an IPS display with great resolution is fine.
VFX? no..
CAD/3D Modeling/Rendering
my current computers are:
-------
problems? other than flakey/finicky magSafe on the laptop, no.. both of these things are sweet - today.
i'll probably wait until coffeeLake mbp which will likely have 32GB ram of lowpower variety.. the imac isn't retina and i'd really like one though not a necessity.. we'll see what the next version has to offer.
but neither of these computers are in 'must replace now' status.. they're both totally fine and not outdated.. and i have a year or two until that stage has been reached
just as an FYI: There are quite a few laptops that are available from a few manufacturers that come with the 1060, and even some with 1080s. the "ultrabooks" don't tend to use discreet GPU's. For example, Razer Blade currently ships with a Nvidia 1060, and the overall package isn't significantly different than the Macbook pro 2015.
https://www.razerzone.com/ca-en/gaming-systems/razer-blade
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-Pro-455-vs-GeForce-GTX-1060-Mobile
So, I think the argument here is that Apple could have easily put in a mobile 470 or 480 in the new Macbook pro, IF, they didn't shave off 2mm from the chassis. So the new Macbook Pro is absolutely a case where Apple's desire for "Form" trumped function. it was more important for Apple to make the new laptop slightly thinner, even if it meant sacrificing thermal headroom and lowering the performance of the GPU. And most people I would wager who want a "pro" machine, would rater the 2mm thicker laptop, but 20% more GPU performance
Not sure what you are talking about. The CPUs were the most recent and also fastest at the market when the MPBs were released. The GPUs were so new that they weren't even on the market (the Pro 460 was the first full Polaris 11 chip to ship in a personal computer). And these GPUs are still fastest available GPUs in their TDP bracket.
Now of course we have Kaby Lake, and thats why Apple is updating the laptops. As to GPUs - there is still no alternative to those Radeons. Nvidia has the 1050 GTX with 20-25% performance more compared to the 460 Pro but also 20-25% higher TDP; since recently, they also have the MX150 that offers similar performance to Pro 450 at comparable TDP.
Did we need an even thinner MBP? Cause frankly that is the cause of situation we are in. In their TDP bracket......and that is the issue..... Anyway, the Specs of the current macbooks for the price is very poor value....for ME. If you see otherwise, awesome.
Apple software works best with AMD cards. I do NOT want a NVIDIA GPU in Apple systems. These GPUs are not bad. They are not marketed towards 4K gaming at 60fps solid. I do not know what people expect from these machines.
That's task dependent. I'm not sure how you can say AMD works better with OSX , Mac Pro users running nvidia cards will strongly argue this point
Did I say it works better with OS X? I said Apple software works better with AMD cards. As in Final Cut Pro primarily.
Needing a NVIDIA card is task dependent too. The most irritating thing about this whole discussion for YEARS now is that people assume that getting 60 fps at 4K gaming means it is a overall BETTER GPU. No. Quadro cards are horrible at gaming performance, but GOOD for WORK. That is what these GPUs are for WORK.
Yes.
And if they had made it another 10mm thicker, they could have fit in a desktop-class CPU.
It's always a compromise.
No, it's a case of a decision you don't agree with.
This, by definition, is the case for any single portable device ever made.
Maybe. Maybe not.
Regardless if it has Pro in the name or not. This is still a LAPTOP. Professionals demand BALANCE. If you are out for a photo shoot, do you want the laptop to only last 2 hours because it has a GTX 1080 in there? No I want it to last 8 hours on battery.
Why aren't people complaining about the Surface Pro which has even WORSE hardware yet it still has Pro in the name. I really think EVERYONE (Sony, Microsoft, Apple, and more) should seriously remove all references to the word Professional because people just do not seem to understand.
In product names, Pro means basic version enhanced. There is no way Pro in a product name can fit the ENTIRE professional market. If you need triple SLI, 128GB RAM, four SSDs, will any Professional laptop help you out?
well, I don't consider the "surface Pro" a Pro device either. But this is macrumors and we're talking about MacBook Pro's
Why do you care what the name is? Pro is just used to mean "better than the Macbook". That is all. ANY computer....YES ANY computer even a Chromebook can be used for professional uses. This whole idea that this system is not professional is just getting really old. There are some cases where a $10,000 desktop is not considered Professional for some people either.
I am just shocked by the severe overreaction to the name of a product. Why not petition Apple to change it to Macbook Plus instead? Would that be better? Oh and their product page will have no mention of professional uses either. Will it suddenly be okay?
It is just a name. I can get my Photoshop work done on a Macbook. There you go, a professional use case.
I know photographers that work on systems with 2GB of memory. It can be done.
i'm old
pro USED to mean "professional" level hardware that was intended for those users who relied on the performance of their hardware for work. People who, the faster the computer is, the faster they could complete their work.
this is in opposition to users who could do their work sufficiently on any computer that could run their software.
the Term pro USED to be used to refer to this distinction.
Now it's just a useless marketing that's being thrown around on any computer that's slightly upgraded from a lower version
IE: Surface Pro v Surface. Neither of these are truly power user performance level devices. despite the Pro badging.
So historically, the "PRO" devices weren't the ones where you compromised performance in return for "form". you complain about the battery life being too low if they put too much power in the evice, sure, but if the MacBook pro was the same thickness as the 2015 model, while offering the quad core performance, a class competing GPU, while having USB-c/thunderbolt and 10 hour battery life, I dont think anyone would complain
the problem with the 2016 MBp, is they sacrificed GPU and battery life for thinner. for those who fit into my description of what "pro" is, the new MacBook pro probably feels like a horizontal move at best from the 2015 model due to the decreased battery life and new thermal limits by smaller chassis
They used to be discrete GPU's, and i would say, were better than the shared stuff u have now-days. Any power taken from CPU is always gonna be slower, regardless of speed. Where as a separate GPU for the task can always handle it better. Otherwise CPU have to time slice... It may be quicker at time slicing, but that won't beat a GPU that can handle the task on its own.
Last edited: